Derpatronic

Today, I was wandering around the 'net, and saw an article on another blog http://bloodofkittens.com/dickmove/2010/11/18/a-call-to-arms-will-it-pick-up-or-just-hit-ignore/#more-320 that I had to read twice. In the article Dethtron refers to a new breed of "fluff bunnies" ( I hate the term, as it is extremely derogatory, and is properly used to refer to heathens that are soft and complacent, but that is another topic) that use "Fluff" to decry the use of redundant units.

I agree that this is retarded, and not just window licking or pants on head retarded, but pants on head, window licking, mouth-breathing, your parents are siblings, going door-to-door with bibles,going for an interview at Sachs with enoughfacial piercings to look like you tried to make out with a porcupine, beliving that Stephen colbert is serious and Glenn beck is not, crapping your pants retarded. As Dethtron put it: What commander in their right mind would use only one unit capable of getting the job done?

Fluff is supposed to compliment the rules, be it in a wargame, or role-playing game. It is what helps to inform decisions regarding bahavior, be it what equipment you use, or hoe you interact with others. it is not rules, and never will be.

Where I disagree is the assertion that fluff can justify any list, it can't, to use an analogy from role playing, if the background of your character's religion states that their god uses a stone headed club, and dislikes technology, and your character is particularly devout, your character, regardless of rules allowing otherwise, will not use metal weapons or armor. The same thing applies to wargaming, if your army has access to multiple factions within the overall army, fluff makes it clear that forces from rival factions need a good reason to work together, usually a charismatic(or particularly brutal) leader. Otherwise, you get a list that, while competitive, goes against the grain and is less enjoyable.

If you disagree, say why, and be prepared to defend you ideas.